People aren't nits. People aren't lice. People are people. Scientifically, spiritually, even genetically, there's no reason to think what makes a human being bad is a result of parental determinism.
Blank slate theory is judeo commie subversion. It isn't a coincidence that niggers are impulsive, violent apes, or that jews are greedy, manipulative, subversive scum. It's written into their fucking DNA.
There are a thousand instances of wisdom from our elders of the type: "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree." Even the ancients knew that the son will be like the father.
And two black people can have white kids thanks to albinism. Doesn't make it the norm.
The silly part is pretending all statistical distributions have the same mean, or pretending we live in some post-scarcity utopia where dedicating resources to people most likely to be disgusting reprobates isn't reducing the resources available for raising more people far more likely to be good and decent individuals.
This isn't a matter of norms or statistical means here. We started with, the context is, who gets protected from mutilation and/or death. The answer is people. My answer is, people, regardless whether they're black or poor or Chinese or whatever. In the United States, in the white Christian world, we protect the young, vulnerable, innocent--we protect children and babies from degradations and predations. We don't assign babies genetic probabilities of being undesirable, then say okay you're fair game for whatever from whomever. That's barbarous.
This isn't a matter of norms or statistical means here
Yes, it is, but you're obviously willing to put your head in the sand before engaging with that.
In the United States, in the white Christian world, we protect the young, vulnerable, innocent--we protect children and babies from degradations and predations.
That is objectively not true. We protect some of them, and leave millions more to suffer predation and degradation from all levels of society. Files documenting some of those most high profile failures to protect have been national news for months now so don't pretend not to know that, not to mention the long history of documented failures around the school system, foster care system, etc. Because the truth is the resources aren't there to protect everyone, and if we're not going to protect everyone then I'd chose not spend those efforts first on the genealogies most likely to grow up into future predators, but rather last.
Then why aren't you letting Evil sterlize itself?
Kids of bad people can grow up to be good people.
C'mon, you know this. Don't be silly.
Nits become lice.
People aren't nits. People aren't lice. People are people. Scientifically, spiritually, even genetically, there's no reason to think what makes a human being bad is a result of parental determinism.
Blank slate theory is judeo commie subversion. It isn't a coincidence that niggers are impulsive, violent apes, or that jews are greedy, manipulative, subversive scum. It's written into their fucking DNA.
Bullshit.
There are a thousand instances of wisdom from our elders of the type: "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree." Even the ancients knew that the son will be like the father.
And two black people can have white kids thanks to albinism. Doesn't make it the norm.
The silly part is pretending all statistical distributions have the same mean, or pretending we live in some post-scarcity utopia where dedicating resources to people most likely to be disgusting reprobates isn't reducing the resources available for raising more people far more likely to be good and decent individuals.
This isn't a matter of norms or statistical means here. We started with, the context is, who gets protected from mutilation and/or death. The answer is people. My answer is, people, regardless whether they're black or poor or Chinese or whatever. In the United States, in the white Christian world, we protect the young, vulnerable, innocent--we protect children and babies from degradations and predations. We don't assign babies genetic probabilities of being undesirable, then say okay you're fair game for whatever from whomever. That's barbarous.
Yes, it is, but you're obviously willing to put your head in the sand before engaging with that.
That is objectively not true. We protect some of them, and leave millions more to suffer predation and degradation from all levels of society. Files documenting some of those most high profile failures to protect have been national news for months now so don't pretend not to know that, not to mention the long history of documented failures around the school system, foster care system, etc. Because the truth is the resources aren't there to protect everyone, and if we're not going to protect everyone then I'd chose not spend those efforts first on the genealogies most likely to grow up into future predators, but rather last.
Hmm.